[Julie Steiner]

I thought we could start a Sapphic anthology here, for Christine P. and others who might be interested in seeing the form's range of possibilities.

I first encountered Sapphic stanzas in my Sappho and Alcaeus class, in Greek. When I next encountered them, it was here at Eratosphere, and I didn't recognize the form at all, I'm ashamed to say. But I found the combo of the unusual meter and the bizarre dialect of this particular poem to be galvanic:
https://www.ablemuse.com/erato/showp...3&postcount=21
Here's the etching that inspired it:
https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/338694

Timothy Steele's "Sapphics Against Anger" is often cited as exemplary, and I do enjoy it, but it doesn't always stick to the recipe:
https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poe...-against-anger
Perhaps his occasional substitutions will provide a liberating precedent for those who might otherwise find the form too restrictive.

I'll post other examples separately. Feel free to contribute your own favorites.

˜˜˜˜˜˜
[Edited to add:]

This Musing on Mastery anthology thread is for collecting examples of Sapphics. It is not for discussing the merits or shortcomings of the form.

Yes, there is some debate as to whether Sapphic stanzas really "work" in English, since Sappho's—and the later Latin versions by Catullus, Horace, etc.—were based on the duration of the syllables, rather than being stress-based, as English metered poetry is. I am aware of this. My bachelor's degree was in classical languages, and I've studied Classical Greek and Latin Sapphics in the original languages. (Which, by the way, often break a word across the third and fourth lines. And, as in most other Greek and Latin meters—including Homer's dactylic hexameter—line-ending syllables are scanned as long, regardless of what their quantity actually is.)

I consider English-language, stress-based Sapphics to be their own species, rather than inherently unsuccessful imitations of the original quantitative meter.

Everyone is free to dislike any form for any reason. For example, I am prejudiced against ghazals, because in my experience that form is almost never pulled off in English in a way that ticks all my personal boxes for what I enjoy in a poem. But I don't feel the need to barge into ghazal appreciation parties to piss in the punchbowl by saying so. I wouldn't have the temerity to expect fans of anything to thank me for helping them to stop enjoying it, just because it doesn't have my celebrity endorsement.

Likewise, don't expect form-contemptuous comments to be well-received in this thread. Please feel free to criticize the shortcomings of individual poems posted to it, but spare us sweeping condemnations of the "Meh, I've never been wowed by this form" variety.

I'm reminded of this observation by member David Upton in 2006 (in a General Talk thread titled "Villanelles, Triolets, and Other Crap Forms":

For me, forms are containers. In my humble opinion, a generalized statement about whether villanelles are any good or not is like stating that one hates martini glasses or that one likes martini glasses. Personally, I love sipping icy-cold gin from a martini glass; others may not. The real problem I have is when the host decides they like martini glasses and tries to serve me beer in one. But, I don’t rail against the glass; it’s the host that gets my scorn. And there are many other containers, some of which are more versatile and can be used for a multitude of beverages, including my icy gin. That’s my take on it anyway.

We aren't supposed to resurrect long-dead threads by posting to them after a long period of silence, so perhaps if people want to discuss forms they love to hate, a new General Talk thread could be started for that purpose. Let's keep this one for collecting examples. Thanks.